After I told Gatti I wasn't going on television, I started to worry about finding another lawyer to take my case. Gatti was the first lawyer I had gone to, and he had said I had a case. I knew I still did. But I had already delayed for about 2 years and there was only a year left until the statutes expired. I called up my old "boyfriend" from high school who went to law school and was working at a firm in Texas. We never had that much to talk about, and sometimes I questioned whether he was really as smart as he was "supposed" to be, but he'd suprised me several times. One of his more serious girlfriends had broken up with him after college, he said, partly because she was pissed off he skipped class to play frisbee and smoked too much pot. Despite the pot and frisbee, he usually knew how to land on his feet, through connections if nothing else. Well, and he must be smart, because he did so well on his LSAT and exams when he wanted to.
He got into a law firm at $80,000 a year in Texas, for the most high priced attorney in the area, who charged something like thousands per hour or at least $1,000. He worked on chemical analysis and research for cases and then left with a couple of buddies to start his own firm.
At the time, he was still working for the firm, and I asked him what he thought about Gatti's proposition. He said it wasn't proper for a lawyer to use my case for their other cases and said I should report him to the Bar. So I did.
I made my first report about lawyers, to the Oregon Bar, and this put me on bad footing as no lawyer wanted to take me, practically, after I did this. I did it only because I thought it was the right thing to do. What really made me mad was that Gatti started lying over the phone and by email, claiming the photos of the shack were never for MY case, but for their other cases. Gatti denied having EVER taken my case to begin with, stating there was no written contract. My friend in Texas said a written contract wasn't the only way to prove a lawyer was represneting me, and that by other proofs, he obviously HAD taken my case.
So Gatti was lying to me, which upset me, after they knew what I'd been through, and then Greg Smith sent me an email comparing me to Glen Close in fatal attraction, which he knew was unfair.
After that, I simply asked them for copies of the photos they had taken and they told me the photos had been "lost". A bunch of B.S. Right before they knew I was going to report them to the Bar, Smith sent me an email saying Happy New Year and that perhaps things could go forward and let bygones be bygones. I wrote back thank you but it sounded like he was just trying to butter me up to avoid a Bar complaint and they still hadn't given me the photos or acknowledged they HAD taken my case, at least initially.
Dan was "working" on my MVA at the time and a Donna Ciaramella was involved, representing Farmers, and she was a major disaster, doing anything and everything in her power to prevent me from getting a much needed knee surgery. My knee/femur had been broken in the hit-and-run. I had uninsured motorists so the claim fell to my own insurance company.
Around this time, I had an abnormal number of problems. My friend Christa always knew my plans and what I was going to do next, and I told her when I was going to the hospital. Another Abbey lawyer, John Kaempf, was involved along with Dick Whittemore, and his own father was a doctor. Kaempf worked on behalf of several political campaigns and with lobbyists, on behalf of doctors and physicians. He traveled to Washington state and was involved in the cap on damages for Personal Injury claims against doctors and hospitals. Kaempf was well-known and is well-known, in medical circles.
I tried to get simple X-rays of my knee after the accident, and when 3 views were taken, the doctor only showed me 2 of the 3 views, and left out the one with the angle that showed a newly broken femur. I was told there was "nothing there".
I'm getting ahead of myself.
So back to the Bar complaint, I filed one against Dan and Greg, and they responded by claiming I was "troubled" and that they never represented me. The Bar was beyong nasty to me, and I had to deal with a Mary Cooper, attorney for the Bar complaints, who tried to dismiss my claims out of hand. When I came back at her with arguments my Texas friend gave me, she just became more intent on finding a way to dismiss my claim although she had to pass it on to the guy in charge of the whole Bar, Jeffrey Shapiro, who was also nasty towards me.
I was again shocked that Dan and Greg would lie about me, and slander me when they knew I wasn't "troubled", but this is what they did to get out of being held accountable. I have always questioned what their motives were with me from the beginning, since then.
You have to know some of these "plaintiffs" attorneys for the victims of clergy abuse are really working for the Roman Catholic church all along. I used to be trusting and naive like the rest of my family until I was personally involved with the justice system and saw what goes on firsthand. I probably saw more than most, because while most lawyers assumed I was a dim-bulb they could snow, I was onto their game as they lied to my face, looking me in the eye, and feeding me a bunch of lying legal bullshit and misinformation, believing I was buying it just because they had a degree and a license.
If anyone doesn't believe plaintiffs attorneys are sometimes a front for working for the other side, they should look up the case of one Carrie Bell v. the state, where eugenics were not a bad thing, and disabled people had their children taken from them and were sterilized against their will. The entire case of Carrie Bell was a "test case" and purposefully brought about by a plaintiffs attorney who filed to stage a mock-fight against the state, simply in order to lose and set precedents on BEHALF of the state.
It has made me wonder about the Archdiocese bankruptcy case in Oregon which I was a part of. Some of the things that happened there, and which were happening before it ever went to bankruptcy court, have made me wonder. For one thing, plaintiffs/clergy abuse victims were losing a lot of cases which made the Archdiocese vicariously liable and responsible for actions committed by priests from parishes, and Catholic schools, and monasteries. I did some research into Canon law and compared it with secular law, and found everyone was lying. Those clergy abuse victims could have held the Archdiocese accountable and yet no lawyer was making the proper argument. I made photocopies of everything and still have them.
After what I've seen, it would be correct to call me jaded.
I will tell you what happened with my knee and trying to get medical care for it, and my journey to find another clergy abuse attorney next. I need a little ergonomic break for my wrists at the moment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment